Disaster Risk Assessments (DRA) in Sub-National Planning and Decisionmaking Processes

By: Renan T.Tanhueco (PST Member, NEDA) This paper accompanying the module provides a brief explanation of the concept and methodology for integrating DRA results in Sub-National Planning and Decision-making Processes. It attempts to provide merits of the Provincial DRA in terms of supporting decisions at the local level. Can the current DRA approach proposed at the Sub-national planning be used for local level planning? And if so, what are the useful features and possible modifications? Another question being addressed is how climate change implications be integrated into the current DRA with their results used to plan cities and municipalities in the Philippines? 1. Imperatives for Action The past few years have reminded us that disasters affect anyplace and anyone. The recent tragedies such as those as in Indonesia (2006) and Haiti (2010) earthquakes, the Philippine flooding (2009) brought up by Typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng have left thousands of people dead, left millions homeless and have added to other losses in terms of livelihoods and resources lost. It is widely believed that disasters can be avoided through disaster risk reduction initiatives. Governments around the world have committed action to reduce disaster risks. Priorities for action had been identified by member states of the United Nations through the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA 2005, ISDR), to substantially reduce disaster losses by 2015. The HFA offers five priority areas of action, namely: 1. Make disaster risk reduction (DRR) as a priority by ensuring that it is a national and local priority through a strong institution capable of implementation 2. Know the risks and take action by identifying, assessing and monitoring risks leading to an effective warning system 3. Build understanding and awareness through knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels 4. Reduce the underlying risk factors by ensuring that exposure to hazards, vulnerabilities of people and their places and resources are protected and safe, thus resulting to resilient communities. 5. Be prepared and ready to act by strengthening the disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels. The HFA (Point No.2) of 2005 emphasizes that decisions need to be informed of the risks for action to take place by identifying, assessing and monitoring risks. By building an understanding and awareness through knowledge, innovation and education, it aids in forming a culture of safety and resilience, which may reduce risk factors, such as exposure to hazards, vulnerabilities of people, their places and resources. This eventually will result to resilient communities. Besides maintaining a current information base to understand potential hazards, resilient

communities should be well informed in the preparation and implementation of its future growth and improvement plans (i.e. development plans), and be able to allocate financial resources from national and local capital markets for climate change mitigation and adaptation initiatives and for response and reconstruction in times of natural disasters. As already known, a hazard and risk assessment methodology is available for the subnational planning process (NEDA, 2009); however, the methodology was only applied for subnational level and does not include emerging concerns such as the climate change impacts to development. To deal with climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction issues, the current initiatives should address the consequence of climate change and the increased frequency and intensity of extreme events and disaster related to this change.

2.0 The Rationale The sub-national DRA guidelines reveal initially, that the risk values are coarse estimates, in view of the quality and level of data (i.e. aggregated areas defined by floor areas and provincial level crop land areas, use of national level data (NSO data),and that the vulnerabilities (i.e. fatality rates, and cost of damages rates)were obtained from national figures. Such information provided are useful for planning for exposure reduction and initiating mitigation at the regional and provincial level; however, but may lack resolution to inform actions needed at the local level. Hence, there is a need to define further, the vulnerability and risk estimation requirements at the local level, so that specific vulnerability reduction and mitigation may be pursued with confidence and to explore further, how sub-national assessments can guide local decision making towards risk reduction. The emerging issues of climate change implications also warrant an approach to mainstream them in local level planning. While local climate change variability and downscaled climate change information may not be available yet (SNC, 2010), there is a need to incorporate the information in the decision making process in local development and land use planning process. This paper only attempts to provide approaches to improve data and estimation for DRA at the local level, following the sub-national risk estimation procedures and to provide insights on mainstreaming useful for local and sub-national levels. 3.0 The Objective The objectives of this paper are to present views on mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) results in Sub-National and Local Development Planning and Decision-making Processes. Specifically: To present, in brief, the NEDA DRR Mainstreaming with focus on integrating disaster risk assessment (DRA) in Sub-national development and physical framework planning processes. To provide views on integrating Sub-national disaster risk assessment and their implications in development and land use plans (at local levels)

4.0 Assessment in Mitigation Planning An assessment is a process for analyzing the condition of the susceptibility of the site, a building, people and operations that may be affected or exposed to a natural hazard. It provides for a statement needed by stakeholders to do action, such as: to prepare, to allocate resources, organization, provide mitigation.

4.1 Risk Reduction in Development and Land Use Plans The primary purpose of risk reduction in Sub-national, municipal or city planning is to identify policies, actions, and tools for implementation over the long term that will result in a reduction in risk and potential for future losses community-wide. This is accomplished by using a systematic process of learning about the hazards that can affect a community or city or municipality, setting clear goals, identifying appropriate actions, following through with an effective mitigation strategy, and keeping the plan current. Effective planning forges partnerships that will bring together the skills, expertise, and experience of a broad range of groups to achieve a common vision for the city or municipality, and can also ensure that the most appropriate and equitable mitigation projects will be undertaken. Risk reduction planning is most successful when it increases public and political support for mitigation programs and preparedness, results in actions that also support other important city or municipal goals and objectives, and influences the decision making to include hazard reduction considerations and improving resilience. Integrating in a city or municipal land use plan is effective in reducing disaster risks as this allows the risks and their management become part of the development concern. With a systematic procedure of assessing them, the strategies, programs, projects and activities are rationally determined. They are seen as municipal and city investments that support development and rational planning of land uses. 4.2 Levels of Assessment For purposes of planning and zoning regions against hazards, the information provided by hazard inventories and physical susceptibilities may be useful for giving information, gaining consensus on actions needed, or giving advisories; however, this may have limitations about the hazard character so as to identify appropriate more specific mitigation measures for and to prioritize these measures considering available resources, existing institutional arrangements and capabilities to undertake risk reduction measures. Without substantial hazard information, it is difficult to initiate laws and ordinances towards hazard reduction. For regional and provincial planning, the character of the hazard must be fully explained and understood. In terms of zoning a wider area, the results may simply be preliminary if hazard details are qualitatively described. For local level planning, detailed information about hazard character, as obtained from more quantitative approaches may be sufficient to support laws and ordinances towards hazard reduction and local zoning. Delineations (or geographic extents), the nature of the hazard, its magnitude, onset, and other physical attributes as obtained from more intermediate or advanced procedures helps to provide a better assessment, which can further aid in describing

and ensuring better zoning criteria and delineations on the ground. With the inclusion of vulnerabilities and risk information, the elements at risk are identified, asset and life losses are quantified and so the type and degree of structural (building retrofits)and non-structural interventions, programs to reduce vulnerabilities and ensuring that zoning take away the population and important assets ( as practically possible) from high risk area are removed. As the type of intervention to be pursued to reduce risk becomes more specific for the element of concern (a parcel of land, building site, building), information on the hazard and susceptibilities of the element at risk similarly requires more detailed information. For example, building performance against an earthquake event will require further investigation on the response of the structure from different excitations of the ground. This may require geotechnical investigations of the building site and simulations to provide for the appropriate structural retrofit. Zoning the area for the possible types and heights of buildings allowed will make use of this geotechnical information. Laws and ordinances may be based on the results of these more detailed (or advanced) information.

Table 1.Types and Levels of Zoning

Note: X = applicable (X) = may be applicable Source: Paul T. Finlay, (2010),GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSING PLANNING POLICY AND CONSENT REQUIREMENTS FOR LANDSLIDE PRONE LAND INSTITUTE OF GEOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR SCIENCES (NEW ZEALAND). Presentation , De La Salle University

4.3 A Brief Review of the DRA Concepts used at the Provincial Level In this section, a brief review of the disaster risk assessment concepts at the Provincial level is presented. The DRA follows a four step process, namely: (a) hazard characterization and frequency analysis, (b) consequence analysis, (c) risk estimation and (d) risk evaluation. Hazard Characterization involves identifying and characterizing the hazard(s) that threaten an area. As a process, it involves the LGU to do the following: 1.)Prepare an inventory of all hazards that threaten the Province/Region, which includes collecting hazard information and maps relevant to risk assessment from mandated agencies and preparing hazard

inventory matrix; 2) Determining the return period for each hazard event which includes estimating return period for earthquake related hazards; estimating return period for volcanic hazards; estimating return period for hydro-meteorological hazard events and preparing a frequency table. The output is an inventory of hazards that affect the planning area. Consequences Analysis involves determining the consequences of these potential hazard(s) to exposed population and land uses .Two measures are used to determine the consequence: fatality and cost of property damage in a hypothetical event. Their expressions include the following: For estimating fatality:

CF = PAP FF

Where CF refers to the consequence in terms of fatality per hypothetical event of the hazard; PAP Is the potentially affected population and FF is the factor for fatality (or a person fatality rate). The potentially affected population is obtained using the product of the population density and the common geographical areas between the hazard and the land area. For estimating damage: CPr D = PA Pr FPr D Where CPr D refers to the consequence in terms of damage cost per hypothetical event of the hazard; PA Pr Is the value of potentially affected area and FPr D is the factor for property damage (or a damage rate). The potentially affected area is obtained using the product of the replacement value and the common geographical areas between the hazard and the land area. The consequence analysis provides a measure also for computing risks expected from various hazard events. This however, requires the probabilities of occurrence of various events.

Figure 1. Framework for Mainstreaming DRR in Sub-National Plan

Risk Estimation involves estimating the risk (annual basis), expressed as the expected annual number of lives lost, damage to property For estimating fatality risk: RF = P C F Where RF refers to the risk of fatality for hypothetical events of the hazard; P is the probability of occurrence ( 0-1) assigned for the event of concern and C F is the value obtained in the consequence analysis. For estimating property damage risk: RPr D = P CPr D Where RPr D refers to the risk of property damage for hypothetical events of the hazard; P is the probability of occurrence ( 0-1) assigned for the event of concern and CPr D is the value obtained in the consequence analysis. Risk Evaluation involves prioritizing areas (i.e. municipalities and cities or their clusters) for further assessment and assessing vulnerabilities of the elements at risk in the area. Assigning a priority score for each municipality requires the computed risks for fatality and property damage costs computed at the barangay levels, be aggregated to meet criteria to qualify under a certain category of the levels of risks. These are performed for each hazard of interest affecting the Province. Identifying the high risk areas (among municipalities) is followed by a vulnerability assessment which can be carried out with the local level. Elements considered are the population, social infrastructures, service infra- structures, transport and access, economy, and environment.

4.4 Importance of Risk Evaluation to Local Planning The importance of Sub-National risk evaluation to local level vulnerability assessment is to understand the dynamics of the social and economic activities of the area, how these activities affect the resources and use of the land, how it results to the income and services developed and how the hazards can result to induce stresses among these elements and their interactions. This is where Provincial level planners, could direct their concerns about more specific concerns hazard implications on municipal, inter-municipal and inter-provincial interactions. Given the wider geographic area, the assessment of vulnerabilities and risks at the provincial level appears as uniform, because of the resolution of data used to represent them, for example-population density, crop areas, and buildable areas (residential and non-residential) areas do not provide further information about their true condition, exact location and distribution. For local DRA, adjustments on the data requirements for hazard assessment and the elements considered for vulnerability assessment need to be pursued. This section describes these suggestions on risk evaluation for both the Provincial and Local planners.

Hazard Another reason for continuing local level assessment is to improve on the hazard information. The hazard maps used for the Provincial level were mainly susceptibility maps which may not meet the requirements of a local level risk assessment especially on information on coverage, character, and duration. For example, in floods, other than depths, timing of floods such as time of rise, time to subside, duration of flooding, velocity and debris carried are useful to understand the onset, nature of damage, and how it develops into risks and so specific mitigation measures can be applied. Similarly, for earthquakes, , site characteristics ( soil, geology, disturbed sites) and secondary hazards ( dam breaks, spilling of hazardous materials) which may be triggered may need to be identified and assessed to provide a clear picture on the nature of the hazard, vulnerabilities posed by the site on the elements placed above them. Alternatives to create better hazard information is to use geomorphologic data ( flood, earthquake); that is to study the origins, development of the land formations , which helps determine potential of hazard to occur. Another method is to use historical information about the hazard events recurring and the resulting damage and losses. This however, relies on being able to document the events and the quality and detail of assessment of the event. A third approach is to use modeling of the hazard event provides another alternative for deriving event scenarios. It must be realized though that substantial research must be poured to demand assessment of various site specific hazards impacts. A combination of these approaches is likely to provide better information. The various approaches require a local investigation to make the risk information locally placed and as possibly required, site specific. Whether the addition of detail of hazard information can be aggregated to improve on the Provincial level hazard information remains to be seen. This is so because, for example, the availability and detail of hazard information may not be the same for all municipalities, such as about periods covered (events of concern) may be different, the damage assessment and reporting may not be uniform, and the description may largely be qualitative and hence making it difficult to organize or create useful information for event assessments. Table 1 provides information for improving on current hazard map information.
Table 1. Suggested additional information for local hazard assessment Hazard Information Land slide Information sources Local reports by Municipal DCC New and existing inventories mandated agencies, research team Soil and geotechnical surveys Studies and models on rainfall intensity, earthquake shaking correlation with landslide occurrence Frequency of observed occurrences per area, or per length of road Local maps of danger zones with Descriptions and Measures Type of landslides Number of recorded occurrences along identified susceptible areas in the municipality or locality

Floods and coastal surges

Geomorphology of basin, past flood studies, flood control system in place Local reports on flood monitoring, event damage reports Warning systems in place (stage records, flood records, dam operation records, flood control operation records),Rainfall ,records during storm and flood events, wind information Site inspection and field investigations to identify danger spots or zones Geological Studies and Surveys Community based monitoring in place

Source of floods, nature of floods, impacts of floods to locality, Topography, contours of the place, water table, tidal information, ground

Flood depth, debris carried, time of rise , time for water to subside, velocity of flow, areal extent of flood, Frequency of flooding (inland or coastal) Local maps of danger zones

Earthquake related (groundshaking, liquefaction prone areas, tsunami)

Existing geomorphology of and geology studies Geotechnical studies in the area as a requirement by building officials PHIVOLCS recording of shaking events/ liquefaction, REDAS information base Site inspection and field investigations Future geological studies and surveys Site inspection and field investigations to identify danger spots or zones Community based monitoring in place Warning systems in place Geologic and geomorphologic studies in the area PHIVOLCS recording of volcanic activity in the area Site inspection and field investigations

History of seismicity Number of recorded occurrences along identified susceptible areas in the municipality or locality Frequency of observed occurrences(or intensities) per area, or per source, Local maps of danger zones

Volcanic Activity

Number of recorded occurrences along identified susceptible areas in the municipality or locality Frequency of observed occurrences(or intensities) per area, or per source, Local maps of danger zones

Future geological studies and surveys Site inspection and field investigations to identify danger spots or zones

Community based monitoring in place Warning systems in place Geomorphology of basin, past drought studies, water availability records Local reports on drought, damage and loss reports

Drought

Number of recorded occurrences along identified susceptible areas in the municipality or locality Frequency of observed intensities) per area occurrences(or

Maps of affected areas Note: Relevant agencies must be consulted in identifying and validating information and in preparing maps.

Box 1. When hazard information is lacking to provide resolution on the nature of the risks, one may resort to past studies or provide models for developing scenarios. For example, for floods, greater clarity on the flood hazard is provided with the following details: flood depths, frequency of each flood event, duration, time of rise, time to subside, entry points and pathways of flooding, among others. Combining information from the city or municipality disaster reports and field investigations may reveal a correlation of the intensity of the flood with the corresponding damage and loss. This should be described and assessed to understand impacts arising from different degrees of flooding, as resources would allow, The output of this process should at least (a) identify highly affected areas; (b) identify the factors creating the flood challenge; (c) provide an explanation of its causes; and (d) identify its implications to the areas or sectors affected and to the local government; and (e) determine the needed policies for hazard mitigation (e.g., flood walls, rerouting of flows, temporary detention of water, tree planting, among others) (f) assess capacities and available finances for pursuing mitigation or adaptation. Similar requirements are also suggested in profiling other hazards of the municipality/city.

Population The use of the population density matters because for the area exposed, the intensity of population in that area reflects the potential number of people affected; however, it does assume within its construct, that the population is uniform over the unit area described. This may not be true, as reality, describes that population are usually concentrated on settlements (or built up areas) and their locations and distributions do not reflect uniform arrangement. A detailed assessment can look into the following suggestions:

A map of the location and distribution of the affected settlements. A selection of potentially vulnerable segments of the society such as schools in high risk areas, indigenous persons, special population groups in high risk areas (elderly, physically challenged, children, indigenous peoples) and low income segment. Population of school children (elementary, high school), number of exposed population and percentage of exposed population below poverty line can be used for the assessment. The use of Community Based Monitoring Systems (CBMS) data can be useful to prioritize communities for disaster management.

Migration, Population growth and Location can help in interpreting urbanization of the Municipality and determine growth over high risk areas

Building and infrastructure For some types of hazards, building damage is the first sequence of the chain of events before casualties can result. These are most evident in hazards involving earthquakes, flooding, tsunami and wind related disasters. Building resilience against the pressures and forces posed on them by the hazard event (or magnitude), determines the type and degree of damage expected. These necessarily require an understanding on the way these buildings and their components (structural and non-structural) behave and perform against different hazard events. Casualties result depending on the building damage, the use and occupancy, time o day, among others. The addition of information at the barangay or local level planning shall preferably include the following: Building typologies (types) of different functions and their performance against several hazards of concern and past disaster information focusing on the following:

Performance and damage information of different material constructions Nature of damage, amount of damage and their counts recorded Contents in the structure Valuation of the structures Compliance to building codes ( old and new) Condition of the structures Importance of structures and functions

A focus on possible areas where mass casualties can result should limit the coverage of the study, such as schools and hospitals, building units for residential and non-residential purposes (such as government institutions, commercial buildings). Buildings of historical or cultural significance should also be included in the study, so as to identify the necessary adjustments (ex. special retrofits) that may be needed to maintain their life. Service Infrastructures such as waterlines and wastewater, drainage facilities, treatment plants, communication lines and towers deserve individual assessments and the results should measure the damage and the disruptions that result. Similarly, the information on these structures should involve:

Performance and damage information of different utilities Nature of damage, amount of damage and their counts recorded Valuation of the structures Compliance to building codes ( old and new) Condition of the structures Importance of structures

Transport and Access

Transport and Access is important as the roads and bridges, for example, allows the movement of the people, goods and services into and outside an area, and provides circulation within the area.. The resilience of the roads, bridges linking ports and harbors, air ports into the study area to the different hazard magnitudes affects the continuity of functions of the area and those depending on the areas economy. Important buildings, networks or linkages (existing and proposed) of national, provincial and local importance should be reflected over hazard maps. The information should include:

Count, proportion, capacity and condition of roads, bridges in high risk areas Classified road networks (national, municipal, barangay road etc.) Bridges by Type and their conditions Number, condition and importance of Port and Harbors Number, condition and importance of Airports Damage information on these buildings and structures Transport demand and supply, and trip distributions

Economy The economy can be physically described by the location of buildings and structures in the City or municipality. The location of employments centers, industries providing export products, emerging economies and the interrelationships of these industries (linkages of inputs and outputs), service areas ( ex. commercial), agricultural areas, mining areas, among others describe a fabric which can be manifested by their form, arrangements and design, and the linkages formed by the land, air and water transport and access systems . Information shall also include registration of business establishments revealing their numbers, locations, distributions, amount of investments, area and numbers of farmers in high risk municipalities (palay, corn, coconut etc.), area and numbers of livestock and poultry in high risk municipalities. Historical damage and loss may reveal the impact of hazard events on this sector. Environment The information on the destruction and loss of coastal and forest resources, flora and fauna due to (potential) actual exposure to natural hazards should be prepared. This should cover site conditions of exposure (e.g. number, being in a catchment area, poor drainage, distance from a hazard source or path -i.e. fault line, 4 km eruption zone) which create the unsafe conditions of these areas. Sea level rise of certain value will have and more inland areas submerged. Negative hazard impacts on Land use may result to similar negative impacts to settlements and economy, such as reduced areas for agriculture, reduced forest areas, among others. 5.0 Integrating the Regional and Provincial DRA results Planning of the City or Municipality looks inwards and outwards. Looking inwards means the planning considers the city or municipality within the context of the bigger geography; and

planning outwards looks into the role and implications of the city or municipality plans to the wider area such as the Province or Region. In relation to risk reduction and planning, the following general steps are suggested. a) Prioritized areas are marked for further investigation Since the provincial DRA is premised on susceptibility and potential hazards defined in Agency maps, field investigations should add more information on said maps to reveal site specific, high risk areas. The local DRA shall focus on these areas. Together, they form part of the inventory of information and can be used to physically screen planning areas. High risk areas are listed. Figure 2 shows a Surigao del Norte risk map revealing prioritized areas (e.g. fatalities and damages) for further investigation.

Figure 2. Priority Map showing the areas based from risk estimates. b) Review and validate the elements at risk and their vulnerabilities in high risk areas. The Provincial DRA also reveals the vulnerabilities of the place. These are earlier prepared in matrices to help explain the risk estimates prior to planning the Province. The assumptions and decisions can be reviewed and validated with the local DRA exercise. At this point, the matrices can be reviewed for localizing its values specific to the municipality/city or its sub-areas. c) Risks as a development problem How does the Province view the risks? What are the implications to the municipality or city if left unattended? Local people or local authorities (city or municipality) may have differing views or perspectives of what constitutes the risks in their places. Experiences in the city or municipality, as well as, results from the local DRA can confirm these initial views of the risk at the Provincial level. Vulnerability assumptions and risk assumptions become clearer at the local level. Key analysis points should be listed and form part of

the local level assessments. They can be initially grouped under the following categories against the sectors affected.

Life threatening or are direct threats to public safety; Threat to the sustainability of key production resources or employment activities; Threat to the delivery of basic services; and Harmful or destructive to protected areas, flora, fauna, and other protected natural resources.

d) Goals derived from issues & problems are reviewed and aligned with the vision of the Province or Region. The vision of the City or municipality should reflect the role it will play in the region or province. A revisiting of the vision statement, as well as, the goals set for the municipality or city can check if a re- alignment of goals with the Province or Region is needed. This can form part of the setting goals and objectives portion of the local planning process e) An objective/target shall focus on increasing resilience or in mitigating risks of a sector. In each development sector, matrices showing the goals, objectives, strategies and programs, projects set by the Province should be reviewed by the Municipality. In relation to development and land use objectives and strategies, the risk reduction measures deal with increasing the resilience of the communities (social, economic, environmental related) and in mitigating the hazard (infrastructure and land use) which hamper growth & development. Risk reduction strategies such as: Avoid or eliminate remove a risk trigger or deny a risk- creating activity; Mitigate reduce the frequency or the severity by changing physical characteristics or operations; Share or transfer shift the risk-bearing responsibility to another party; Retain fund potential losses with own resources Increasing resilience means reducing vulnerability to life, resources, economy, incomes, access to services. The local government planners should identify, list and confirm these connections between the analysis risk results and the risk reduction measures proposed. These are the points of validation after the local risk assessment is prepared. Land use plans (Provincial level) and transport and access linkages should be cross checked with the existing and proposed land uses. The important implications to local plans must be reviewed (ex. physical/infrastructure plan and land use) at the evaluation stages of the planning (i.e. after the DRA has been completed). f) Plans for implementing disaster risk reduction strategies should be reviewed Implementation and schedules provide important information on how the future local plans can take off. For example, the proposal of a flood control structure (e.g. dam and levees proposed at the regional or provincial level) or an on-going project study can affect future drainage systems and easements at the local areas. It can be expected to

meet resistance because of proposed routes or realignments cutting across settlement areas, without proper procedures for selection and remuneration. g) Local DRR plans provide inputs to higher levels plans After the local DRA and planning has been completed, the Province, HLURB and relevant agencies review the local plan along with the Provincial plans (or agency plans) and update the latter. With consultations among relevant stakeholders, the local plans get approved and adopted 6. An On-Going Process

The DRA methodology by NEDA (2009) used in sub-national planning, provide a process to inform decision makers on hazard exposure, valuation, aggregation of elements, costs of damage of structures, crops and fatality rates. The methodology for risk quantification still undergoes adjustments as more specific, reliable data and information becomes more available: exposure element and their attributes may need to be more specific(e.g. buildings or smaller clusters instead of aggregated built up areas) clearer attributes, delineations and coverage of hazard prone areas new valuation for other elements recurrence interval of hazard events known

The scientific community and academic institutions can be tapped to provide the needed estimates for current mainstreaming purposes. Less rigorous methods of qualifying risks (e.g. use of indices) are also available in literature. To evaluate the consequences of these risks to the different development sectors, stakeholders have to validate the estimates. This may be done through the conduct of experts group meetings and local consultations through focused group discussion(s). Here, key stakeholders who have good knowledge or have experienced natural calamities, disasters, or other environmental degradation that affected or is affecting the community should be tapped to assess and evaluate the risks.

References:
Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board(2006), CLUP Guidebook. A Guide to Comprehensive Land Use Plan Preparation, Vol.1. Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board(2007), CLUP Guidebook. A Guide to Sectoral Studies in the CLUP Preparation, 2007, Vol.2. Jose, S.G,2010, Integrating Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation (DRR/CCA) in Local Development Planning and Decision making Process, NEDA-UNDP-AusAID Project,1st Experts Group Meeting, Jan, 12, 2010 presentation, Summit Ridge Hotel, Tagaytay City

NEDA-ADB,2007 Guidelines on Provincial/local Planning and Expenditure Management, Provincial Development and Physical Framework Planning Volume 2, NEDA-ADB, 2007 NEDA-UNDP,DIPECHO, 2009, Guidelines on Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction in Subnational Planning and Physical Development SNC Project Management Team, 2010, Enabling Activities for the Preparation of the Second National Communication(SNC) on Climate Change to the UN /FCCC: An Overview; NEDA-UNDPAusAID Project, 1st Experts Group Meeting, Jan13, 2010 presentation, Summit Ridge Hotel, Tagaytay City State and Local Mitigation Planning; How to Guides,: Understanding Your Risks: Identifying Hazard and Estimating Losses(FEMA 386-2),(August 2001) by Federal Emergency Management Agency The Allen Consulting Group, Climate Change Risk and Vulnerability, Dept. of the Environment and Heritage, Australian Greenhouse Office 2005 United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, 2005, Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters, Final Report. World Conference on Disaster Reduction, UN/ISDR, Geneva